fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3077 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3077 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Lackadaisy Cats]

__________________________________________________

03.

(Gorillaz)

__________________________________________________

04.

(Tripping over you)

__________________________________________________

05.

[Stitchers]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Dragon Age]

__________________________________________________

07.

[The Mighty Boosh]

__________________________________________________

08.

[LOVE LIVE!]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Brooklyn 99]

__________________________________________________

10.

[Mad Max Fury Road]

__________________________________________________

11.

[Maggie Stiefvater]

__________________________________________________

12.

[Emily Alice Ovenden]

__________________________________________________

13.

[When Marnie Was There/Omoide no Marnie]

__________________________________________________

14.

(Rick and Morty)

__________________________________________________

15.

[Suppression]

__________________________________________________

16.

[Wall-e]

__________________________________________________

17.

[Ancillary Justice & Ancillary Sword]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 086 secrets from Secret Submission Post #440.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

DA

I agree with the OP for the following reasons:

A) Having a child via surrogate can incredibly expensive, and that money would be better spent on adopting a child that's already been born In some cases, adoption might be cheaper.
B) The stress of IVF/surrogacy can play havoc on a couple's relationship and compromise their ability to raise a child that manages to get through each trimester.
C) While surrogacy screening is fairly rigorous in the US, it isn't in a lot of other countries, and the laws can leave everyone in the lurch. Here's a prime example. http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/67729154/Fresh-surrogacy-concerns-after-Australian-parents-abandon-baby

Simply put, I find surrogacy a(n ethically) dubious practice, and I cringe to think that women are so desperate for kids they'd go to that length. It makes me wonder why a woman (or man) feels that a kid is so necessary to lead a full life. I grew up around people who never had kids but had a strong sense of self worth and fulfillment anyway.

Other people have different feelings, needs and priorities to you or the people you grew up with. News at 11.

AYRT

I'm a little disappointed that you killed the neutrality of your statement with that news at 11 bit. Otherwise, I'd have bought you a drink (alcoholic or not) for posting the least inflammatory comment I've seen on this site in a while. Bummer.

NAYRT

When it comes to A), do you have any comprehension about how lengthy and complex, judgemental and downright heartbreaking the adoption process can be in some places?

AYRT

Yes, and I feel that adoption process reform is needed (especially on the private end). It's something that I feel pro-lifers tend to neglect in their campaigns, which is a little messed up considering I feel taking on adoption reform would net them more supporters. While my husband and I have no desire to have kids, we've decided that if we change our minds we are going to adopt and most likely start off as foster parents to older kids.

DA

Do you realize just how lengthy a process instituting those reforms would be? They're absolutely necessary, but even if they were begun today, the process of researching, formulating, passing, and instituting policies that deal equitably with all parties involved (prospective adoptive parents, birth parents, and child), along with the checks and balances necessary to keep things equitable would take years, potentially decades. By the time reform was complete, a number of couples currently ineligible to adopt would have aged out of eligibility under even the least restrictive (within reason) criteria.

Surrogacy isn't ideal, but under the current circumstances, it's the only option open to a lot of people.

AYRT

While there are certainly plenty of couples that would currently be left in the lurch, there is still the matter of what today's kids and their descendants will encounter when they go to adopt. I say we should still press for adoption reform in conjunction with addressing the social demand for having (so many kids). Only paying attention to the current situation strikes me as shortsighted, and if I wasn't already pulled in 500 different directions right now I'd be all over pressing for adoption reforms starting today. That way, when the reforms are in place, there will be fewer children in the queue and prospective adoptive parents will have an equitable process available to them that's much easier to maintain. Along with that, hopefully the surrogacy demand will decline, and there will be decreased (but not eliminated) strain on resources that can be used to raise children on a more level playing field financially and emotionally.

OP

Do you know how lengthy and complex, judgemental and downright heartbreaking pregnancy can be?

And I just believe that there is no such thing as an entitlement to your own child. If it doesn't work (naturally or through adoption) then turning to the "easy way" (lucky I'm rich so I can just pay and have my kid produced for me) is saying much about what children have become in [this] society.

I know I'm old fashioned for this but from my experience, people who don't have children (no partner, infertile, gay) either find a replacement like caring for a lot of pets, or they somehow find a way to care for children within their family, adopt them or work in childcare. I think they play an important role in society. And 80% of the 40/50s gay men I know have children of their own, by the way. Either from an earlier Marriage or with a female Friend. (And I totally support rainbow families.)

INstead now, people who can't have children are told that they can have the perfect socially conform nuclear family (<--this has, historically, not been the best development ever) with child, if they just order and pay for it.
This sets norms, and that development is what I find disgusting. The complete subjection of gestation and childbirth to capitalism.

A Prostitute rents out her sexual organs for a few minutes/hours (which I'm cool with, because it's her body, as long as it's consensual), but surrogate motherhood practically offers a flat rate to a woman's whole body and health, and the physical and psychological bond not only TO to the child but also OF the child to the mother. And usually, these children can't be nursed, so they start out generally disadvantaged.
I think that sometimes it can't be helped that mother and child are divided (as with giving up a child for adoption because of reasons) or that a baby can't be nursed, but actively PRODUCING such circumstances should not be as readily accepted, I believe.

You made really good points until your last paragraph. Then it basically just became "I don't understand why a thing is important to other people, and since I don't understand, I don't think it should be important to them" which is so dumb.

AYRT

How would you have liked for me to wrap up my point? Feel free to include a list of logical fallacies that I should make an effort to avoid and any keywords that would be conducive to a more neutral statement.

I really can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

I'm not saying you should make your point differently, though, I'm saying I disagree with it, or at least part of it. You seem to be saying that you don't understand why it's extremely important to some people to have kids, because it's not important to you, with the overall vibe that you don't think it should be important to some people, and that's what I'm disagreeing with.

Not going to get into those psychological assumptions.

C) The U.S. isn't rigorous. About anything. The U.S. fertility industry is "regulated" (if you want to call it that) by a hodge-podge of state and local laws and voluntary national guidelines from nongovernmental associations. (Example: Single-embryo transfer and no embryo storage are federal limitations in Italy. In the U.S., you can get an occasional, dubiously ethical but not illegal, octomom. Generally you just get loads of twin births -- which are considered high-risk multiples, btw.) Paying a surrogate outright might be illegal in your state (likely owing to some past sensational court case), but all the bills related to the pregnancy can be paid, which becomes very vague, gray, and wildly expensive in the U.S.

Hence medical tourism, mainly to India where surrogacy is an existing business model; it is a service that can be purchased at set rates, and it's cheap by comparison and largely unregulated by the government. With the exchange rate difference, carrying one U.S. baby can build a house, start a business, or pay for a relative's entire college education.

But most couples tend to opt for gamete donation (oocyte or sperm) if at all feasible.

[ SECRET POST #3077 ]

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!

Re: Unpopular Opinions!